Menu

Navigation

Social Media

Four Myths about Louie Giglio’s Inauguration Prayer (or lack thereof)

By Rachel Held Evans, on January 11, 2013.

Myth #1: Louie Giglio
was banned from praying at the inauguration.

It appears that Giglio
actually withdrew his acceptance to pray the benediction, though it’s possible
the Inaugural Committee pressured him to do so. (See Giglio’s statement. See
the Inaugural Committee’s statement.) I applaud Giglio’s decision to do as much
as he could to ensure that something as sacred as a prayer did not become overly
politicized or divisive. He made grace and peace higher priorities than his own
celebrity. To me, that’s the essence of what Paul meant when he said, “As much
as it depends on you, live peaceably with all people.”

We would do well to follow Giglio's lead in this regard and discuss this situation with civility, not making more of it than necessary.

Myth #2 Louie Giglio’s
First Amendment Rights have been violated.

Absolutely not true.
Giglio’s freedom of speech remains preserved. The First Amendment protects our freedom of
speech; it does not protect us from the consequences of the things we say. Louie
Giglio maintains the right to speak as freely as he likes about the
inauguration, about Jesus, about human trafficking and slavery, and about
homosexuality. He has the right to encourage his congregation to believe
certain things, to pressure lawmakers to vote in certain ways, and to publicly
protest when things don’t go his way.

But here’s the thing:
So does GLAAD. So do LGBT citizens. They too have the right to free speech, the
right to protest, the right to organize, and the right to affect change.

What happened here was
that Giglio exercised his freedom of speech many years ago with that sermon. As
a consequence, LGBT citizens and allies exercised their freedom of speech by
protesting his involvement in the inauguration. This created enough controversy
for Giglio to see the wisdom of withdrawing.

Let’s turn the tables.
What if the Inaugural Committee had—in a stroke of stupidity—invited Bill Maher
to give a “benediction” at the inauguration? And what if people of faith
protested this, saying someone like Bill Maher, who has expressed outright
hostility toward all forms of religions, should be the last person chosen to
give a benediction? And what if all this pressure and controversy led Bill
Maher to withdraw his acceptance (because you know how he hates being the
subject of controversy!)? Would his
First Amendment rights have been violated?

Again, the First
Amendment protects our freedom of speech; it does not protect us from the
consequences of the things we say. I had a friend once who was badmouthing his
boss at work; when he got caught, he was given a warning that if it continued,
he could be fired. My friend complained to me that his freedom of speech had
been violated. I explained that while the First Amendment protected him from
being arrested by the government for calling his boss names and undermining his
boss’s authority, my friend still had to face the consequences of those words
from his private employer, which could in fact result in his termination.

Another example: When
I tweeted that none of Giglio’s civil liberties had been compromised in this
situation, a follower responded “I’m
surprised you feel this way as this situation reminds me a little of what you
went through with Lifeway.” But there’s a big difference. As frustrated
as I was with Lifeway for not carrying my book, I
never once complained that my civil rights were being violated or that my constitutionally-protected
freedom of speech had been taken away. I understood that Lifeway, as a private
business, had every right to carry whatever books they pleased, and I knew from
the beginning that the consequence of including the word “vagina” could mean
getting banned from their stores. And thanks to freedom of speech, I can
complain about their morality standards all I like! :-) (Yay America!)

Giglio is dealing with
the consequences some things he said in a sermon many years ago. You may think
these consequences are unfair, but they are not unconstitutional.

Myth #3 Louie Giglio is an anti-gay crusader.

Characterizing Giglio as an anti-gay crusader based on a single video from twenty years ago seems unfair, especially when he has spent so little time addressing this in his ministry.

And this is something of
an aside, but I think it is a mistake to assume that Louie Giglio holds the
exact same views on homosexuality today as he did twenty years ago. The fact
that he has not really spoken on the subject since leaves room for the
possibility of some evolution in his thinking and approach. In his statement in
response to the inauguration flap, Giglio noted that “clearly, speaking
on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen
years.”

Now I could be totally wrong on this, but I wouldn’t be the
least bit surprised if Giglio has moved away from his position (implied in the
video) that homosexuality is a “malfunction” that can be “cured” or “healed”
through “reparative therapy." Even some of the most conservative evangelicals I
know are moving away from that way of thinking, which I believe is a very good
thing.

Sometimes I feel like LGBT rights advocates, many
of whom have been treated brutally by the Church of course, assume there is no
evolution happening within evangelicalism, when I sense that there is,
especially among my generation. In other words, I hope this 20-year-old video will not be used as Exhibit A in discussions related to LGBT concerns and evangelicalism. We've made some progress since then, and this video is not representative of how all evangelicals think. It's certainly not representative of how I think.

Myth #4 Evangelical
Christians are being persecuted in the United States

There are indeed
Christians being persecuted around the world. There are Christians who break the
law by gathering together for church, Christians whose family members have been
executed for their beliefs, Christians who have been imprisoned for following
Jesus, Christians who live in poverty and fear as a result of their
faithfulness.

That’s persecution.

Being wished “happy
holidays” instead of “merry Christmas” is not persecution. Being prohibited
from persecuting others (by forcing Jewish kids to pray Christian prayers in a public school, for example) is not
persecution. Not getting your way in every area of civic life is not
persecution.

And I’m pretty sure
that when the apostle Peter wrote his letter to the persecuted Church of Asia
Minor, encouraging his fellow Christians to be brave in the face of oppression
by the Roman government, he was not referring to Christians getting snubbed at
Domitian's inauguration ceremony.

We dishonor the memory
of the millions of Christians who have suffered very real persecution through
the centuries when we confuse a lack of privileged status with
persecution. As Robert Cargill has noted: “There is a
difference between persecution and the loss of privileged status. Just because you didn’t get what you want doesn’t mean that
you are persecuted. It means you can’t have everything.”

We live in a country
in which the majority of its citizens are Christians and in which the president
himself is a Christian. Even if our influence is waning a bit, we are still the
most powerful religious group in America. We have to be careful of becoming so
entitled that we grow blind to the ways in which minorities in America—like
LGBT citizens, for example—are often treated as second-class. I find it ironic
that so many Christians are up-in-arms about being “persecuted” by the "gay
agenda" when many of our gay and lesbian neighbors are simply asking for the
same civil rights that we have.

We also have to be
careful of using the word “bully” to describe what happened with Giglio,
especially when we are dialoging with folks whose experience with “bullying”
may very well have included physical violence, decades of merciless taunts,
hateful slurs, and mistreatment at the hands of Christians.

Myth #1: Louie Giglio
was banned from praying at the inauguration.

It appears that Giglio
actually withdrew his acceptance to pray the benediction, though it’s possible
the Inaugural Committee pressured him to do so. (See Giglio’s statement. See
the Inaugural Committee’s statement.) I applaud Giglio’s decision to do as much
as he could to ensure that something as sacred as a prayer did not become overly
politicized or divisive. He made grace and peace higher priorities than his own
celebrity. To me, that’s the essence of what Paul meant when he said, “As much
as it depends on you, live peaceably with all people.”

We would do well to follow Giglio's lead in this regard and discuss this situation with civility, not making more of it than necessary.

Myth #2 Louie Giglio’s
First Amendment Rights have been violated.

Absolutely not true.
Giglio’s freedom of speech remains preserved. The First Amendment protects our freedom of
speech; it does not protect us from the consequences of the things we say. Louie
Giglio maintains the right to speak as freely as he likes about the
inauguration, about Jesus, about human trafficking and slavery, and about
homosexuality. He has the right to encourage his congregation to believe
certain things, to pressure lawmakers to vote in certain ways, and to publicly
protest when things don’t go his way.

But here’s the thing:
So does GLAAD. So do LGBT citizens. They too have the right to free speech, the
right to protest, the right to organize, and the right to affect change.

What happened here was
that Giglio exercised his freedom of speech many years ago with that sermon. As
a consequence, LGBT citizens and allies exercised their freedom of speech by
protesting his involvement in the inauguration. This created enough controversy
for Giglio to see the wisdom of withdrawing.

Let’s turn the tables.
What if the Inaugural Committee had—in a stroke of stupidity—invited Bill Maher
to give a “benediction” at the inauguration? And what if people of faith
protested this, saying someone like Bill Maher, who has expressed outright
hostility toward all forms of religions, should be the last person chosen to
give a benediction? And what if all this pressure and controversy led Bill
Maher to withdraw his acceptance (because you know how he hates being the
subject of controversy!)? Would his
First Amendment rights have been violated?

Again, the First
Amendment protects our freedom of speech; it does not protect us from the
consequences of the things we say. I had a friend once who was badmouthing his
boss at work; when he got caught, he was given a warning that if it continued,
he could be fired. My friend complained to me that his freedom of speech had
been violated. I explained that while the First Amendment protected him from
being arrested by the government for calling his boss names and undermining his
boss’s authority, my friend still had to face the consequences of those words
from his private employer, which could in fact result in his termination.

Another example: When
I tweeted that none of Giglio’s civil liberties had been compromised in this
situation, a follower responded “I’m
surprised you feel this way as this situation reminds me a little of what you
went through with Lifeway.” But there’s a big difference. As frustrated
as I was with Lifeway for not carrying my book, I
never once complained that my civil rights were being violated or that my constitutionally-protected
freedom of speech had been taken away. I understood that Lifeway, as a private
business, had every right to carry whatever books they pleased, and I knew from
the beginning that the consequence of including the word “vagina” could mean
getting banned from their stores. And thanks to freedom of speech, I can
complain about their morality standards all I like! :-) (Yay America!)

Giglio is dealing with
the consequences some things he said in a sermon many years ago. You may think
these consequences are unfair, but they are not unconstitutional.

Myth #3 Louie Giglio is an anti-gay crusader.

Characterizing Giglio as an anti-gay crusader based on a single video from twenty years ago seems unfair, especially when he has spent so little time addressing this in his ministry.

And this is something of
an aside, but I think it is a mistake to assume that Louie Giglio holds the
exact same views on homosexuality today as he did twenty years ago. The fact
that he has not really spoken on the subject since leaves room for the
possibility of some evolution in his thinking and approach. In his statement in
response to the inauguration flap, Giglio noted that “clearly, speaking
on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen
years.”

Now I could be totally wrong on this, but I wouldn’t be the
least bit surprised if Giglio has moved away from his position (implied in the
video) that homosexuality is a “malfunction” that can be “cured” or “healed”
through “reparative therapy." Even some of the most conservative evangelicals I
know are moving away from that way of thinking, which I believe is a very good
thing.

Sometimes I feel like LGBT rights advocates, many
of whom have been treated brutally by the Church of course, assume there is no
evolution happening within evangelicalism, when I sense that there is,
especially among my generation. In other words, I hope this 20-year-old video will not be used as Exhibit A in discussions related to LGBT concerns and evangelicalism. We've made some progress since then, and this video is not representative of how all evangelicals think. It's certainly not representative of how I think.

Myth #4 Evangelical
Christians are being persecuted in the United States

There are indeed
Christians being persecuted around the world. There are Christians who break the
law by gathering together for church, Christians whose family members have been
executed for their beliefs, Christians who have been imprisoned for following
Jesus, Christians who live in poverty and fear as a result of their
faithfulness.

That’s persecution.

Being wished “happy
holidays” instead of “merry Christmas” is not persecution. Being prohibited
from persecuting others (by forcing Jewish kids to pray Christian prayers in a public school, for example) is not
persecution. Not getting your way in every area of civic life is not
persecution.

And I’m pretty sure
that when the apostle Peter wrote his letter to the persecuted Church of Asia
Minor, encouraging his fellow Christians to be brave in the face of oppression
by the Roman government, he was not referring to Christians getting snubbed at
Domitian's inauguration ceremony.

We dishonor the memory
of the millions of Christians who have suffered very real persecution through
the centuries when we confuse a lack of privileged status with
persecution. As Robert Cargill has noted: “There is a
difference between persecution and the loss of privileged status. Just because you didn’t get what you want doesn’t mean that
you are persecuted. It means you can’t have everything.”

We live in a country
in which the majority of its citizens are Christians and in which the president
himself is a Christian. Even if our influence is waning a bit, we are still the
most powerful religious group in America. We have to be careful of becoming so
entitled that we grow blind to the ways in which minorities in America—like
LGBT citizens, for example—are often treated as second-class. I find it ironic
that so many Christians are up-in-arms about being “persecuted” by the "gay
agenda" when many of our gay and lesbian neighbors are simply asking for the
same civil rights that we have.

We also have to be
careful of using the word “bully” to describe what happened with Giglio,
especially when we are dialoging with folks whose experience with “bullying”
may very well have included physical violence, decades of merciless taunts,
hateful slurs, and mistreatment at the hands of Christians.

Ode to the Turquoise Wonder

Kathleen France – A Woman of Valor

Comment Policy:Please stay positive with your comments. If your comment is rude, it gets deleted. If it is critical, please make it constructive. If you are constantly negative or a general ass, troll, or hater, you will get banned. The definition of terms is left solely up to us.